| Literature DB >> 28788621 |
Kyung-Joong Lee1, Seong-Kyum Kim2, Kwan-Ho Lee3.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between strength and strain in manufacturing controlled low strength materials to recycle incineration bottom ash. Laboratory tests for controlled low strength materials with bottom ash and recycled in-situ soil have been carried out. The optimum mixing ratios were 25%-45% of in-situ soil, 30% of bottom ash, 10%-20% of fly ash, 0%-3% of crumb rubber, 3% of cement, and 22% of water. Each mixture satisfied the standard specifications: a minimum 20 cm of flowability and 127 kPa of unconfined compressive strength. The average secant modulus (E50) was (0.07-0.08) qu. The ranges of the internal friction angle and cohesion for mixtures were 36.5°-46.6° and 49.1-180 kPa, respectively. The pH of all of the mixtures was over 12, which is strongly alkaline. Small-scale chamber tests for controlled low strength materials with bottom ash and recycled in-situ soil have been carried out. Vertical deflection of 0.88-2.41 mm and horizontal deflection of 0.83-3.72 mm were measured during backfilling. The vertical and horizontal deflections of controlled low strength materials were smaller than that of sand backfill.Entities:
Keywords: backfill materials; bottom ash; controlled low strength materials; small-scaled chamber test
Year: 2014 PMID: 28788621 PMCID: PMC5453207 DOI: 10.3390/ma7053337
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Selected properties of the soils and fly ash.
| Test | Bottom Ash | Fly Ash | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Specific Gravity | 2.56 | 2.70 | 2.17 |
| Water Content (%) | 3.55 | 14.06 | – |
| Classification (UIUC) | SP | SP | – |
| Cu (uniformity coefficient) | 3.19 | 5.68 | 16.44 |
| Cc (coefficient of gradation) | 1.17 | 1.18 | 0.63 |
| D10 Size | 0.94 | 0.22 | – |
| D30 Size | 1.82 | 0.57 | – |
| D60 Size | 3.00 | 1.25 | – |
Selected chemical properties of cement and fly ash (Unit: %).
| Type | SiO2 | Al2O3 | Fe2O3 | TiO2 | SO3 | CaO | MgO | K2O | Na2O | P2O5 | Loss of Ignition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cement | 21.80 | 4.40 | 2.90 | – | 2.60 | 63.2 | 3.60 | – | 0.62 | – | 0.67 |
| Fly Ash | 60.33 | 24.78 | 3.82 | 1.06 | 0.88 | 2.39 | 0.84 | 0.86 | 0.59 | 0.50 | 4.84 |
Optimum mixing composition (wt%).
| Type | Recycled | Bottom Ash | Fly Ash | Crumb Rubber | Cement | Water |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case 1 | 45 | 20 | 10 | – | 3 | 22 |
| Case 2 | 35 | 30 | 10 | – | 3 | 22 |
| Case 3 | 25 | 30 | 20 | – | 3 | 22 |
| Case 4 | 32 | 30 | 10 | 3 | 3 | 22 |
Unconfined compressive strength (kPa).
| Type | Curing Time (day)
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 7 | 14 | 28 | ||
| Dry Curing | Case 1 | 319.8 | 436.1 | 726.0 | 754.8 |
| Case 2 | 279.3 | 412.8 | 720.0 | 734.0 | |
| Case 3 | 345.6 | 416.1 | 679.5 | 685.3 | |
| Case 4 | 247.3 | 398.4 | 697.0 | 663.6 | |
|
| |||||
| Wet Curing | Case 1 | 309.1 | 480.9 | 616.1 | 670.9 |
| Case 2 | 260.8 | 413.8 | 413.1 | 488.0 | |
| Case 3 | 395.0 | 624.1 | 748.2 | 838.3 | |
| Case 4 | 295.1 | 518.0 | 535.4 | 652.0 | |
Figure 1.Unconfined compressive strength (qu) and secant modulus (E50) of CLSM.
Figure 2.Relationship between the Kf line and Mohr-Coulomb plot.
Figure 3.(a) Triaxial testing equipment and (b) typical test results.
Test Results of Triaxial Test.
| Curing Day and Method | Parameter
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal Friction Angle | Cohesion (kPa) | a | b | ||
| 14 day; Dry Condition | Case 1 | 434 | 100.8 | 0.69 | 73.2 |
| Case 2 | 46.6 | 67.7 | 0.73 | 46.5 | |
| Case 3 | 43.9 | 93.1 | 0.69 | 66.9 | |
| Case 4 | 40.6 | 160.2 | 0.65 | 121.5 | |
|
| |||||
| 14 day; Wet Condition | Case 1 | 44.5 | 121.2 | 0.70 | 86.4 |
| Case 2 | 44.1 | 89.0 | 0.70 | 63.9 | |
| Case 3 | 43.1 | 143.8 | 0.68 | 104.9 | |
| Case 4 | 40.2 | 150.7 | 0.65 | 115.0 | |
|
| |||||
| 28 day; Dry Condition | Case 1 | 40.6 | 95.1 | 0.65 | 72.2 |
| Case 2 | 42.4 | 49.1 | 0.68 | 36.2 | |
| Case 3 | 41.7 | 82.9 | 0.67 | 61.9 | |
| Case 4 | 40.5 | 113.0 | 0.65 | 85.8 | |
|
| |||||
| 28 day; Wet Condition | Case 1 | 43.8 | 132.0 | 0.69 | 95.2 |
| Case 2 | 43.5 | 108.4 | 0.69 | 78.5 | |
| Case 3 | 47.4 | 97.7 | 0.74 | 66.1 | |
| Case 4 | 36.5 | 180.7 | 0.60 | 145.2 | |
Test results for pH.
| Mixtures | Curing Time (day)
| |
|---|---|---|
| Just after Mixing | 28 days | |
| Case 1 | 12.26 | 11.37 |
| Case 2 | 12.31 | 11.67 |
| Case 3 | 12.62 | 12.19 |
| Case 4 | 12.59 | 11.97 |
Figure 4.Small-scale chamber.
Figure 5.Loading system.
Figure 6.LVDT.
Figure 7.Pressuremeter.
Figure 8.Strain gauge on PVC pipe.
The mixing composition (wt%).
| Type | Recycled Soil | Bottom Ash | Fly Ash | Crumb Rubber | Cement | Water |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case A | 100 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Case B | 35 | 30 | 10 | – | 3 | 22 |
| Case C | 32 | 30 | 10 | 3 | 3 | 22 |
Figure 9.Vertical (a) and lateral (b) deformation of each case.
Figure 10.The longitudinal strain of the PVC pipe.
Figure 11.Lateral earth pressure (kPa).
Figure 12.Deformation (mm) at Surface of CLSM backfill
Figure 13.Settlement shape of the surface.